MetaFilter posts tagged with AnatolLievenhttp://www.metafilter.com/tags/AnatolLieven
Posts tagged with 'AnatolLieven' at MetaFilter.Sun, 05 Nov 2006 09:22:17 -0800Sun, 05 Nov 2006 09:22:17 -0800en-ushttp://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss60Ethical Realismhttp://www.metafilter.com/56057/Ethical%2DRealism
<a href="http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m2751/is_80/ai_n15786858">Ethical Realism</a>. <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/anatol-lieven-and-john-hulsman-/ethical-realism-a-vision_b_32881.html">Anatol Lieven and John Hulsman</a> (<a href="http://www.tnr.com/doc.mhtml?i=w060807&s=ackerman080706">formerly</a> of the Heritage Foundation) make a bipartisan attempt at a more realistic foreign policy, based on prudence and an understanding of others' interests, instead of a utopian belief in democratization. "It seemed to us that in [foreign policy] at least, the United States was almost coming to resemble some Latin American countries of the past, where rival hereditary political clans of 'Conservatives' and 'Liberals' clashed bitterly and even launched savage civil wars with each other - but in terms of real policy were virtually indistinguishable and equally wrong." [more inside] tag:metafilter.com,2006:site.56057Sun, 05 Nov 2006 09:22:17 -0800russilwvongAmerica, Right Or Wrong - An Anatomy of American Nationalism, Fallujah & The Faces of The Fallenhttp://www.metafilter.com/36977/America%2DRight%2DOr%2DWrong%2DAn%2DAnatomy%2Dof%2DAmerican%2DNationalism%2DFallujah%2Dand%2DThe%2DFaces%2Dof%2DThe%2DFallen
<a href="http://globetrotter.berkeley.edu/people4/Lieven/lieven-con0.html" title="The only people who talk openly about an America empire are a relatively small number of mostly neoconservative intellectuals. But on the one hand you have this almost religious belief in American democracy and human rights and the rule of law, what's been called the American creed. This contributes to a messianic belief in America's right, duty, and ability to spread this form of civilization through the world -- something which is very characteristic in the past of the French, the British, and if you go further back, the Romans and the Chinese. They all have this belief in their right and duty to spread their higher civilization to other people. The other form of American nationalism is much more bellicose. It's about defending the nation -- it's not just defending the nation against attack, but also reacting very violently even to the threats of attack or even to what is seen as attacks on American honor or credibility, or verbal attacks on America. This kind of nationalism has often been historically linked to forms of either explicit or implicit racism. This second kind of nationalism provides much of the military energy of America, it makes America a country that is willing to fight much more than any other developed country today. This is one of the things that makes America the classically nationalist place.">A Conversation with Anatol Lieven</a>, Senior Fellow, Carnegie Endowment for Peace and author of <a href="http://www.ceip.org/files/publications/Anatol_America_Right_Or_Wrong.asp" title="In this controversial critique of America's role in the world, Lieven contends that U.S. foreign policy since 9/11 has been shaped by the special character of our national identity, which embraces two contradictory features, the American Creed and Jacksonian nationalism. Lieven examines how these two antithetical impulses have played out in recent US policy, especially in the Middle East and in the nature of U.S. support for Israel. ">America, Right Or Wrong - An Anatomy of American Nationalism</a>, of which <a href="http://books.guardian.co.uk/print/0,3858,5061164-99939,00.html" title="We should have seen it coming. All the signs were there in the 1990s - the mania about resisting outside influences, the narrow religious beliefs, the harking back to a golden age, the sense of being under threat from modernity, the readiness to use violent means. The roots of it went back centuries. But it took the attacks of 9/11 for us to realise how powerful was this burgeoning extremism. Whether the world can deal with it effectively is the critical question of our times. We are not, of course, talking here about Islam or about al-Qaida and Osama bin Laden, but about America... Whether this nationalism is a greater problem than that represented by Islamic extremism is a moot point, but it is clear that the combination of the two could bring disaster on us all.">The nationalism thing</a> is a review. In related <a href="http://www.stoneschool.com/Reviews/MarchOfFolly.html" title="Barbara Tuchman was the greatest popular history writer of the late 20th century, and this is her finest book: a work of history for those who don't read history. Unlike the typical history which tackles a period and/or region, this book examines, in quite of bit of detail, four instances of folly in human history. This turns out to be a remarkably useful device for learning about the kinds of events that drive human organizations to places they don't often go -- and in these four cases, shouldn't have gone. The book defines folly by examining the first case, letting the Trojan Horse into Troy. To qualify as folly for this book, Tuchman explains, acts have to be clearly contrary to the self- interest of the organization or group pursuing them; conducted over a period of time, not just in a single burst of irrational behavior; conducted by a number of individuals, not just one deranged maniac; and, importantly, there have to be people alive at the time who pointed out correctly why the act in question was folly (no 20/20 hindsight allowed).">March Of Folly</a> news, <a href="http://www.newyorker.com/printable/?fact/041115fa_fact" title="The United States' de-Baathification program fuelled the insurgency. Is it too late for Bush to change course? ''For Iraq's traditionally excluded and suppressed Shiite majority and for the Kurdish minority, de-Baathification was an urgent goal. But the Coalition also needed to address the fears of the newly disenfranchised Sunnis, and, on a basic level, to keep the country functioning. Given the difficulty of the project, the occupation policies were markedly lacking in pragmatism.''">Letter From Iraq: Out On The Street</a> by Jon Lee Anderson with accompanying interview <a href="http://www.newyorker.com/printable/?online/041115on_onlineonly01" title="I see the trend that we have already seen continuing. A reliance upon and, I think, a revved-up momentum for using military clout; I think the gloves will now come off in the Sunni triangle, and I think the fighting will become bloodier in the short and medium term. There will be an effort to cripple and to demoralize the Sunni community. And on the sidelines, we will see some negotiating room for tribal leaders, Baathist leaders, and others who will seek to come in from the cold. But I don't see any great alteration in the strategy. Things have gone too far, and I think that the Administration sees that it has no choice but to continue this strategy in an intensified way, because the only alternative is to leave Iraq.">How Iraq Came Undone.</a> At one bottom line: <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/world/iraq/casualties/facesofthefallen.htm">The Faces of The Fallen</a>. tag:metafilter.com,2004:site.36977Sun, 14 Nov 2004 15:18:12 -0800y2karlThe Push For War (by Anatol Lieven).http://www.metafilter.com/20530/The%2DPush%2DFor%2DWar%2Dby%2DAnatol%2DLieven
<a href="http://www.lrb.co.uk/v24/n19/print/liev01_.html">The Push For War (by Anatol Lieven).</a> "The most surprising thing about the Bush Administration's plan to invade Iraq is not that it is destructive of international order; or wicked, when we consider the role the US (and Britain) have played, and continue to play, in the Middle East; or opposed by the great majority of the international community; or seemingly contrary to some of the basic needs of the war against terrorism. It is all of these things, but they are of no great concern to the hardline nationalists in the Administration....The most surprising thing about the push for war is that it is so profoundly reckless....What we see now is the tragedy of a great country, with noble impulses, successful institutions, magnificent historical achievements and immense energies, which has become a menace to itself and to mankind."
<br><br>
Excecutive summary: <a href="http://www.yale.edu/yup/books/079567.htm">Lord Acton</a> foretold all fruit of "military superiority". </a> tag:metafilter.com,2002:site.20530Fri, 04 Oct 2002 01:38:14 -0800fold_and_mutilate